CANADA STALLING on mediation: Six Nations

Natives accuse Ottawa of foot dragging
Won't agree to land-claims mediation: Six Nations

http://www.thespec.com/News/CanadaWorld/article/650491
October 09, 2009
Daniel Nolan
CALEDONIA - The Six Nations Confederacy is accusing Canada of stopping progress in talks to settle land claims because it won’t agree to mediation.

The Confederacy, appointed by the elected-band council in 2006 to conduct negotiations with Ottawa and Ontario, also says commitments by Canada to help fund Six Nations in order to create an “equal bargaining field” has not been forthcoming and it has had to lay off staff and rely on “the goodwill of our people to attempt to maintain a presence at the negotiation table.”

The statements were made by Confederacy representatives today at the conclusion of the latest round of land claim talks, which first began in May 2006 to try to resolve a dispute over the occupation by natives of a Caledonia housing project. It blossomed into other land claims, and saw Ottawa make two offers - $125 million and $26 million - to resolve different claims, but no agreements have been reached.

In the meantime, natives have halted development projects in Brantford and Hagersville because they say they’re being built on unsurrendered Six Nations land.

Ontario supports the idea of bringing in a mediator, but Confederacy spokesman Aaron Detlor said Canada has consistently blocked it. Names of judges have been proposed with no response, he said, and lately the name of Dr. Peggy Blair has been suggested. She is a leading lawyer in aboriginal affairs and completed negotiation skills training at Harvard Law in 1993.

“We need the assistance of a mediator-facilitator,” he said. “We have a fundamental disagreement about one party showing up at negotiations and saying ‘Here is the agreement. Take it or leave it.’ That’s not negotiating. They show up and say, ‘Here’s how we’re going to negotiate a settlement. You’re going to take what we’re going to offer and not ask any questions about it.”

Federal officials left before reporters could speak to them and could not be reached for comment later. A spokesperson for federal Indian Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl could not be reached for comment.

On the issue of financing, Detlor said the Six Nations team has been without any funding for the last six months. He said it has had to let go three people, such as a researcher, and plans to cut two more. They have suggested $1.2 million is adequate to help them with the ongoing negotiations.

“It diminishes (our ability to negotiate) significantly,” Detlor said about the cash shortage. “Ontario has seven or eight people and the feds have seven or eight people. We don’t have the same back office support they have of hundreds of people. We have five people.”

“It’s simply not fair to ask people to put their lives on hold in good-faith negotiations without any ability to feed their families.”

Detlor said talks have not broken off and the three sides are set to meet again next month.

“We’re committed to continuing talks and we’re hoping the federal Crown will see the light of day,” he added.

He wouldn’t say frustration by land claims supporters will lead to more demonstrations, but noted: “Significant business interest in this part of Ontario is on hold until we get a mediator-facilitator. People are not going to come here and invest in this area if we cannot get a simple agreement on a mediator-facilitator.”

'We keep getting blocked'
http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2096313

The Haudenosaunee Development Institute went public with its complaints against the province and the federal government on Thursday, accusing them of delaying negotiations over land claims.

In a hastily arranged news conference after the latest table talk among the institute, Canada and Ontario, three HDI spokesmen announced the governments are balking at all their suggestions for a mediator-facilitator who could help move the process along and are refusing to assist with funding for natives who are engaged in the process.

"We have been working at getting a mediator-facilitator for four months," said spokesman Aaron Detlor, who is also a lawyer. "We keep getting blocked time and time again."

Detlor said the HDI has suggested various names, including Canadian judges, and has been open to input from the governments about who could be brought in to offer impartial advice on moving forward.

The terms of reference for a mediator-facilitator have already been agreed upon, so it's just a matter of selecting a person.

"We've tried to make a process where everyone can be satisfied and we get forced back by a federal crown with a message that's basically 'Our way or the highway'"
Additionally, no one working on the negotiation process has been paid for the last six months and Detlor said the HDI has had to lay off three of its five-member administrative staff , including a researcher, assistant and co-ordinator.

"It diminishes us."

Detlor said each of the governments shows up at the talks with seven or eight highly paid negotiators.

The lawyer also said the HDI is not halting the talks, but is hopeful people will demand their politicians push for more movement.

HDI's Mike Bomberry read a prepared statement saying the natives have lost good faith in the negotiation because of the approach Canada and Ontario have chosen to take, creating an "unfair bargaining field."

With no administrative funding support from Canada, the natives have relied on volunteer assistance at the negotiation table and have had to lay off staff .

"(We) may now be forced to shut down offices at the Oneida Business Park since it cannot aff ord the rent," said Bomberry.

Aboriginal Affairs Minister Brad Duguid, reached at the legislature in Toronto, said his instructions to negotiators have been to be as flexible as possible.

"We're enthusiastic supporters of bringing in a facilitator to try and trigger more progress in the talks," Duguid said.

"We continue to support the Haudenosaunee/Six Nations people and urge the federal government to show as much flexibility as possible to reach a consensus on who that should be."

The minister said he hasn't seen the names suggested as a facilitator, but he sees no reason why a suitable candidate can't be swiftly found.

Representatives from the federal and provincial government did not remain at the Oneida Business Park after talks today to offer comment.

In related negotiations, Brantford was back in court last week regarding its injunction against native protesters and was rewarded with a clarification from Justice Harrison Arrell that says the native protesters are prohibited from stopping work at the 10 development sites named in the original injunction.

The clarification seems aimed at the protests of Floyd and Ruby Montour who recently stopped work on Erie Avenue, along with a handful of supporters.

Meanwhile, Brantford police are investigating comments made on an Internet discussion board about the protesters.

One poster suggested the native protest could be stopped through a violent act and the Montours were asked to discuss their safety with police.

Copyright © 2009 Brantford Expositor

Settlements "stalled under Strahl" ... ?

Land claims talks could stay stalled under Strahl

Six Nations chief not thrilled with re-appointment

Posted By JOHN PAUL ZRONIK, EXPOSITOR STAFF

Posted 16 hours ago

Six Nations elected Chief Coun. Bill Montour doesn't hold much hope that land claims negotiations with government will move any quicker following Chuck Strahl's re-appointment as federal minister of Indian Affairs.

"I'm not feeling that positive," Montour said following the swearing in of Stephen Harper's new cabinet on Thursday. "It seems like Ontario and Canada are comfortable with creating this (negotiating) process and to keep it going low key, put about a million dollars a year into it and have Six Nations fight over it."

Montour said Strahl has a "distant relationship" with Six Nations, in part due to health problems that limited his ability to meet with native leaders. Strahl, who was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2005, became minister of Indian Affairs in August 2007.

"With all due respect to Minister Strahl -- and he is very ill -- there was a lot of protection around him from his senior staff," Montour said.

The chief questions if Strahl understands the Six Nations community. Following a meeting at the minister's Ottawa office last February, Montour invited Strahl to visit the reserve to see Six Nations needs first hand.

"He said: 'Do I need a protective escort?' I said: 'Why would you need that?'" he recalled. "But that's the mentality. It's just crazy."

Six Nations, Ottawa and Queen's Park have been holding land claims negotiations since May 2006 without resolving a single claim. Montour said the people of his community expect a greater sense of urgency from the federal government when it comes to negotiations.

LIKE JIM PRENTICE

The chief does see hope in the appointment of Jim Prentice as Canada's new Environment Minister. The chief said Six Nations is considering establishing its own environment department that would examine proposed developments on Six Nations land -- and deal with other issues -- and could use the federal government's help.

"Minister Prentice understands First Nations issues," Montour said. "He's well aware of on-the-ground situations in communities across Canada."

Prentice was minister of Indian Affairs from February 2006 to August 2007. He also served for 10 years as a commissioner of the Indian Specific Claims Commission of Canada, which conducts inquiries into land claims disputes, and is recognized as a land claims negotiation expert.

Article ID# 1274046

Six Nations elected chief not hopeful about land claims deal

Posted By John Paul Zronik

Posted 1 hour ago

Six Nations elected band council Chief Bill Montour doesn't hold much hope that land claim negotiations with government will move any quicker following Chuck Strahl’s reappointment as federal minister of Indian affairs.

“I’m not feeling that positive,” Montour said following the swearing in of Canada’s new Conservative cabinet on Thursday. “It seems like Ontario and Canada are comfortable with creating this (negotiating) process and to keep it going low key, put about a million dollars a year into it and have Six Nations fight over it.”

Montour said Strahl has shared a “distant relationship” with Six Nations, in part due to health concerns that limited his ability to meet with native leaders. Strahl, who was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2005, became minister of Indian affairs in August 2007.

“With all due respect to Minister Strahl — and he is very ill — there was a lot of protection around him from his senior staff,” Montour said.

The chief questioned if Strahl understands the Six Nations community. Following a meeting at the minister’s Ottawa office in February, Montour invited Strahl to visit the reserve to see Six Nations needs first hand.

“He said: ‘Do I need a protection escort?’ I said: ‘Why would you need that?’” Montour said. “But that’s the mentality. It’s just crazy.”

Six Nations, the federal government and the provincial government have been holding land claim negotiations since May 2006 without resolving a single claim. Montour said the people of Six Nations expect a greater sense of urgency from the federal government when it comes to negotiations.

Montour did say he sees hope in the appointment of Jim Prentice as Canada’s new environment minister. The chief said Six Nations is considering establishing its own environment department that would examine proposed developments on Six Nations land, as well as other environmental issues, and could use the federal government’s help.

“Minister Prentice understands first nations issues,” Montour said. “He’s well aware of on-the-ground situations in communities across Canada.”

Prentice was minister of Indian affairs and northern development from February 2006 to August 2007. He also served for 10 years as a commissioner of the Indian Specific Claims Commission of Canada, which conducts inquiries into land claim disputes between first nations and government, and is recognized as a land claims negotiation expert.

Article ID# 1273757

It's our survival we're fighting for' says chief

Posted By SUSAN GAMBLE, EXPOSITOR STAFF

Posted 10 hours ago

The ownership of Eagle Place is tortuously complex but residents there don't have to worry about being evicted from their homes by natives.

While Chief Coun. Bill Montour assured people at Wednesday night's TRUE meeting they don't have to worry about a native coming to their house to kick them off the property, he was careful to note it was his opinion. But Montour noted that the chances for development to continue in Eagle Place are pretty slim.

TRUE -- Two Row Understanding through Education -- has been holding regular meetings to try and help educate people on native land claims issues.

"Do people in the Eagle's Nest Tract own their own property?" asked resident Elizabeth Martin at the meeting.

Montour said while the land was only leased, it's accepted that third parties came in and put money into the land, improving it over the years and building houses.

"Our argument now is with the government of Canada and Ontario," Montour said, suggesting that, rather than reclaiming residential land, natives would like to see a portion of Ontario's land transfer tax paid to Six Nations.

But Montour indicated that there should be no more development.

"The Eagle's Nest is a flood plain and we should leave as much as we can for farm land."

Montour went into the background of the land claims and various injustices perpetrated upon the natives over the years.

With almost 11,500 status natives on the reserve plus 6,000 people without status there isn't enough infrastructure to cover the needs of the residents.

"We're in very bad straights. We can't build another house. Our economy is in the dumper. We have an awful drug problem in the community. If we have a major fire in Ohsweken, we're done.

"We're not creating havoc for Brantford on purpose. It's our very survival we're fighting for."

Montour offered a lesson in native arithmetic.

The band spent $84 million last year: $21 million from Ottawa and $27 million from the province. The rest came from other sources like Casino Rama, user fees and hydro agreements.

Meanwhile, Grand River Enterprises, just down the road from the council house, paid up to $130-million in excise taxes for the year. Montour adds in an estimated $20 million in taxes paid by native professionals in various jobs.

HAVE TO GO BEGGING

"So Six Nations alone put $140 million into the coffers of Ontario and Canada last year and we have to go begging. I've been accused of destroying the economy of Brantford. Well, what about our economy?"

Montour and his co-speaker, land historian Phil Monture, thanked the protesters who have stood against development. Montour also credited Monture with the years of land research he did in Six Nations' land office where an inventory of every land claim in the tract was assembled, tracing the transfers and payments made for the last 200 to 475 years.

Monture explained how Six Nations originally worked to set up lease agreements for Eagle's Nest lands, including a 1843 agreement that laid out the native intention to lease the land.

"These are government documents all filed with Indian Affairs," Monture said. "The government confirmed the leases. They're all registered documents."

Monture said the government raised the issue of selling the land in 1844, but no surrender was made. Then the native trust fund was raided, lease payments weren't made and some land was sold without native agreement.

"Canada says even if it wasn't a surrendered, they believe we intended it to happen. When we say 'No, we didn't' they say well, we'll have to agree to disagree."

Monture also spoke to the relationship between Six Nations and its neighbour, Brantford.

"Our neighbours have our people in court and claim they knew nothing about our land claims in the city. Well, who have I been talking to for the last 33 years?"

Monture showed an agreement made between Six Nations and Brantford in 1997 that negotiated the building of a sewer crossing of the Grand River -- an unresolved land claim.

"The mayor today was on that council when that agreement was signed," said Monture.

"The city of Brantford has boomed on our land and we got nothing."

That boom, said Monture, has overstretched development onto the flood plain of the Eagle's Nest, which is inappropriate.

He suggested that development in the downtown area was more appropriate and wouldn't be stopped.

Councillors James Calnan, Marguerite Ceschi-Smith and Greg Martin were in the audience but declined to answer challenges from the audience.

Article ID# 1272191

Review: Six Nations presents its case (2006) Update from Grand River November 16, 2006 Our lands side table meeting was held on November 14th. To me, it was an excellent day and opportunity to not only put our position on the table, but also to put OUR records and documentation of history on the table, our Wampum. Chief Pete Sky and Sub-Chief Leroy Hill spent the morning giving an oral presentation explaining the history of our people from the time the Creator gave us our Law, the process to uphold it, to the coming of the Europeans, right to present day; using several of our original wampum which they had brought in, to explain that history and relationship with the Crown. The first wampum explained was the Circle Wampum and how it was a very old record, given to us by the Creator, binding on the Nations and the people. They explained the roles of the chiefs and how they are on the outer rim of the circle and how everything else, the people, our languages, our beliefs and everything else in creation is in the middle. How the Chiefs are bound by rules and responsibilities given by the Creator and how the circle ties all the Chiefs in there and how they cannot go outside of it. They further explained how that it is possible for our people to get lost and to pass outside of this circle and how it is up to the Chiefs to give guidance. An example of this is when the Indian Act came in and this was something outside of the circle and how we've kept it outside, even today; and they explained how the Indian Act takes away from what the Creator gave us. They explained the roles of each nation, how the council process works, the keepers of the eastern and western door and how consensus is reached. They explained further the process when there is something that is spoiling the minds of our chiefs and when consensus can't be reached and how throughout this process, how the Chiefs represent the wishes of the people and how that still exists today. They then went on to explain the Tree of Peace and how the tree being a shelter and shaded everyone, and that there were alot of policies and arrangements so that if others wanted to follow it, there was a mechanism where they follow these roots to the tree. Next they explained our wampum used during council, saying the best way to describe it was it being our Mace. Back in the beginning when it first came to our people, and how there were policies in place to deal with other nations who wanted to be a part of that Peace and how some others that had heard about it and wanted to take shelter under it, and how they were welcomed under that. Talked about how the Five Nations became Six Nations when the Tuscaroras came and how it was kinda like in modern day times would be like a probation period, but how they were brought in, and while they didn't add new strings or titles on the wampum, they fit them on the Condolence Cane with the younger nations. They explained how the Tutello's and the Deleware followed the roots as well, and how we made peace and alliance with them, and how there were many others who came as well and how alliances were made where they sat and counselled. They then explained why we have two strings of wampum/mace and how when the RCMP came in in 1924, they stole the orginial mace along with all of our council mintues and records and how we didn't get the orginal mace back for over 60 years. The Crown thought that by stealing our wampum we would be unable to council, but the Chiefs got together and made a new one, and have been using that one ever since. They explained further how it came to be known that some of those that were on probation having taken shelter under the Great Tree, were actually part of the conspiracy, and that they worked against the Law; but how it didn't work, they were unable to break that circle and today, our council still functions. They then began to explain the Dish with One Spoon Wampum. They talked about a time when there was constant fighting amongst the Onkwehonweh and why the Creator sent the message to help us when we were fighting over Game. This belt shows ruling and policy and how the whole earth is covered in goodness, the white shell representing one dish, the beaver tail was symbolism that no knife (no harshness) was used, and that all the earth is goodness and everything you survive from was to belong to everyone equally, including the newcomers. It was for everyone's use and benefit. No one was left out and we all had rights and responsiblities to protect that dish. This is how the war was settled and how the Peacemaker came, and gave us the Law of the Land. They explained a little more how the Creator had sent His Messenger and that still today, this is how it is suppose to be, we have shared hunting, shared fishing, and what we are guiding ourselves by. How we can still go to other areas, where there might be salmon, or buffalo or other agriculture, and how we still all feed from the same dish. This is one area that we have constant problems with and that this is what the Creator gave to us, and this is what we have to follow. He explained how today, it gets us in conflict with their law and there is a lack of understanding and respect there and why he has pointed this out. They went on, now we are coming to the point of contact and how we had come to a really far reaching agreement with many nations and tribes were under the policy of eating with one dish. They explained how the British and the French were always fighting and how this area, became known as the Beaver Hunting Grounds because the beaver pelts were the economy of the day, and how the British and French were fighting over who would control it. How the British put his hand over this area on a map saying he wanted to protect it from the far north to the far south, with the King saying "I will put my hand over it and protect it, but how they needed to build forts and put weaponry in there in case the French came in" and since our ancestors and the French were at odds, our warriors could come and work with them to protect it. This is where the 1701 agreement came from. The King asked for this to protect the area, this is what they done, and to this day, they are still suppose to protect it. It is still under agreement today, the Law of the Land was functioning when they got here, and it is still here today. Our instructions were to uphold the Law, and they explained how this was the first land scam, because the British made it a deed. For our Chiefs and our people, there was no giving up the land at all, it was only suppose to be protection, and how we didn't sanction the 1701. Again, they explained how at this present time, we struggle with that because we still have that same concept of one dish, with our land and our resources. It was this dish that caught the British's eye, actually, the law of the land from our Creator. Our ancestors were promoting that, the four white roots to all ends of the earth, and with the arrival of the Dutch, the French and the English, we applied those ideas from that to deal with those who arrived.....with a good mind, Peaceful, and that there'd always be good friendship between us. This is when they wanted to proclaim us as son, and we told them we have to be equal or we'll run into problems, and that we'd be as brothers, standing at the same level. And once again they explained how this is an area where we still have problems today. This is where the Two Row Wampum and the Covenant Chain comes in. How there were issues between their ship and our canoe and the many problems to be resolved and the first to make an agreement with us was the wooden shoe people, the Dutch. Recognizing the difference between us, different ways, different beliefs, different laws, different language, and they said, what you do you keep in your ship, and we have our canoe; and how we'd travel the river as two separate ships and these things or ideas between us will be tied together with a chain of friendship and how that comes from that Circle Wampum and the Chiefs being the holders of that, and that how the Dutch, the English and the French sanctioned it, as well as the United States when it was born, and they sanctioned it as long as the sun shines, the grass grows, the rivers flow, this the the Law of the Land between us, and we've never broken it, and that it still exists as long as things are in motion on earth. They also explained how at the beginning it was a rope tied between the two, and how it later changed to a chain, and then to a chain of silver and that how every so often we'd get together to repolish it and remove the tarnish that would be the troubles between us. They told of how it was said that anytime there was trouble that they'd only have to shake their arm, and how this is what made the Crown wealthy. Many times they would shake their arm, and this made them wealthy from us. We have no other way to relate to the Crown and we have never abandoned this, this is how our ancestors laid it out for us. When this part was done, they then went back to the mace and explained how this knowledge has been handed down and preserved and how it is in these things (our wampum) and embedded in there. It is our records, and how the Great Law was here for many generations before the arrival of the Dutch the French and the English. They explained how in the past, just as they do today, when there is something to be investigated, the Confederacy Council will appoint delegates to go out and examine the issue thoroughly and report back to council. Just like today that this delegation has been mandated to try and resolve this and bring it back to the council fire for sanctioning. They then went on to explain how Deskaheh was given sanctioning by council to represent the Six Nations issues and how he tried all he could with the Crown with no luck, and he thought maybe we can get help from England, but no help. Then he heard about his place where the world sits together and he went to try and get justice and freedom for our issues and how he spent close to a year there. He went with an international lawyer who explained to him how the actions of the Crown were that of Genocide and that they would get protection. This never happened. What he got was banished and Canada told him if he comes back, his body parts would be spread across the world because he humiliated Canada. He died and was buried in Tuscarora, and Canada did this to him. His nephew know well what happened to him and what his family experienced. They tried to use those laws, supposedly world laws, to protect our interests and the Chiefs of the day were in agreement, cause they thought if this was true, he wouldn't have been exciled or threatened with his life. At this point, a video of Deskaheh's nephew, Chief Cleveland General was played. In the video Chief General explains how it was the understanding of our people that there came a time when the Crown wanted to build a road connecting Lake Ontario to Lake Erie, and they would build this road of planks. This is how it became known as Plank Road. He talked about how this was only a lease and how today, that road is still a lease and title still is with the Six Nations. He explained how the lands around it were to be leased only to ploughs depth and that anything below that, they were suppose to get sanctioning from the confederacy council. He also talked about how there was to be no liquor sold on that road. He then explained how Joseph Brant was sanctioned to deal with some of the land. When the video was finished, Pete asked Jock to explain more about what Chief General had told about Joseph Brant and what went on back then. Jock explained how Brant had been given sanctioning by the Six Nations who had formulated an idea to get the land cleared for agricultural purposes and how the money that would come in from leases would be on a continual basis as an ongoing income. This is where the original 4 blocks of Brantford were leased, under a 999 year lease. The chiefs had figured this idea would work back then and how in almost 1000 year lease, the income would be coming in before the mortgage was up. What Brant did though, was he went beyond his mandate and leased blocks 5 and 6 as well. Jock also told them how what Chief General told us is the understanding here, in this mace, and how the decisions and words of record are in the mace and the knowledge that we're relying on is what has been passed down, and that Chief Generals uncle's father was sitting there, and how it is fairly fresh in his mind like these issues with Plank Road. Jock also explained when questioned, how the records that were stolen along with our mace in 1924 were never returned, how our Confederacy Council puts things under their pillow if they don't have concensus, and how these things that are embedded in our wampum, meaning that at each council we refresh our minds with the past council minutes so that things aren't forgotten, and that this is how our history has been handed down, generation after generation. Chief Sky also continued explaining the relationship between the ship and the canoe and how it was clearly defined what was going to happen and that the Crown created a force, and some matters were given ie; murder, rape and theft, and it was defined clearly. They were there supposedly to protect us - it was a mutual protection, and how it went beyond that and how the crown took it further with the RCMP in 1924. Chief General explained to him how the one's who taught him told him about the red jackets, and how the red coats were there to control the crowns people, not ours and how it is clearly defined by treaty and the reason we are telling you this is because you are making it like our people are lawless and that there is no lawlessness on our side, and how the role of the police was clearly defined by treaty and that how they were suppose to protect what was between us, but now they use it against us, and this is another thing we need to get straightened out. The Creator gave that to the Confederacy to look after as far as the well being of our people. And then they talked about "surrender" and the difference of understanding. It was always the understanding of our Chiefs that what they were doing was authorizing the Crown's peacekeepers to look after the squatters. Back then there were friends of the Six Nations that had agreed to follow the concepts of the Great Law and how we agreed to keep them close by, and that they would help with agriculture. They referenced the Nelles', the Youngs' the Empire Loyalists, and how the Six Nations have not given up the land to this day and what the Chiefs had sanctioned and what was written as a surrender by the Indian Agent and his friends had a different thinking and idea than the truth. They were exploiting and taking advantage of the generosity and benevolance of what we had in place. Again, the Six Nations had a long range plan to have the non-natives clear the land and remove the stumps as a short term lease so that it would be ready for our future use. What the Chiefs were doing was giving the Crown sanctioning to protect us from the squatters, and how when the Crown presented their legal position two weeks ago, they blamed the squatters on us. It was the Indian Agent and his colleagues who were encouraging squatters to get the land, and the Six Nations were sanctioning the Crown and their police force to protect us from the squatters so that we'd always have land. This is altogether different than what was written and what is in our mace. What we thrashed out in council is different than what the Indian Agent put down and it began with the 1701. Blocks 1 - 4 in Brantford is still ours, with roughly 797 years of payments to be made. Our understanding of sanctioning the crown to uphold and protect, was taken and written down as a surrender. This too has to be clarified. It was never said we'd given up our land. It is forbidden for Chiefs to think that way, we have to help our people preserve for the future. Chief Sky ended the morning further explaining what was being presented and what they are seeing here, is what decrees who we are. Our policies and what we've done with the land. This is what's been handed down and these wampum are the record of that memory. This is to show our proof and has been our proof of what our ancestors put there for the coming faces and what the Crown has, can't cancel this out, and what happens between us, this can worked out. The afternoon was filled with more current facts and documents presented by local historian Rick Hill, and Six Nations/Haudenesonne Research Delegate Phil Monture. Both men gave a detailed accounting and rebuttal of the document tabled by the Crown at our meeting a couple of weeks ago, and clearly pointed out many dates, council minutes, documentation and correspondence between Six Nations and the Crown, concerning many areas of conflict with respect to the underhanded and double dealing of the Indian Agent at the time, summarizing how it was all part of a scheme by the Crown to get our lands from us. While Rick Hill pointed out that for every conclusion they have, we can find published documentation to the contrary, Phil cited document after document as proof that there was a constant notice to squatters from the Crown and that it was quite explicit in notice given to settlers on plank road who were without license to vacate our lands. There was even documentation in January of 1844 from the Governor General at the time to a number of persons who had intruded on Six Nations lands and that such persons were to be removed from the tract. Rick Hill challenged the Crown that there is no documented evidence that the Plank Road itself was ever surrendered, and Phil backed up that position stating that the Plank Road, Hwy #6, is still under the jurisdiction of the Six Nations. Phil also tabled a colour coded map which showed specifically lands that the Six Nations had never been paid any monies toward their leases, and that the majority of the town of Caledonia falls under those lands. The Crown began issuing patents for lands within the town plot of Caledonia in spite of the many protests from the Six Nations. They also went into detail of how the Grand River Navigation Company put a system in place to induce the selling of our lands, and promoting squatters to staying on the land telling them if they have to be moved, Six Nations would have to pay for it. There was even evidence from some of the trespassers to say the Crown weren't in any way giving option to Six Nations in what was to happen with their lands and how it was a scheme to get the land away from Six Nations with no compensation. In the 1800's the Six Nations wanted to hire lawyers to stop this fraud, and Canada passed a law forbidding Natives from hiring lawyers. Six Nations position remains the same, there is no surrender document. Clearly, the Six Nations presented a full and complete history not only of how the Crown had frauded our lands away, but also how they had usurped the authority of our Traditional Government, imposed their laws on our people which is a violation of the ancient agreements between us, but far more concerning, a Direct Violation Against Creation. It is my opinion, that as of the 16th of November 2006, the Crown has been put on notice, and has been spirtually reminded of their responsiblity in upholding the Law of the Land. It is the Honour of the Crown that is in question as the Onkwehonweh have continued to uphold our responsiblities to our lands, our law, and our people. And it is the Crown who will answer to the Holder of the Heavens for the many violations of the Law of the Land that was given to us, and the violations against His Children who were given the job to protect it. In Love Light and Peace, Hazel

Huron-Wendat nation claims vast swath of Quebec

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=91a8678e-0968-43e7-a167-96ca534f7c6a

Marianne White , Canwest News Service

Published: Thursday, October 16, 2008

QUEBEC - The Huron-Wendat nation presented Thursday a potentially costly claim against Quebec and the federal government over a 24,000-sq.-km stretch of land that encompasses the cities of Trois-Rivieres and Quebec City.

Based on historical research, the Huron-Wendat claim their ancestors occupied the vast territory - almost half the size of Nova Scotia - which includes the two cities, as well as most of the Laurentides Wildlife Reserve and three Quebec provincial parks.

The nation will seek a retroactive financial settlement for past development on the territory. While it declined to put a figure on the claim Thursday, the Huron-Wendat nation received $12 million in 2000 from the federal government for a specific land claim settlement over a 2.5-sq.-km territory located outside Quebec City.

The Quebec minister responsible for aboriginal affairs acknowledged Thursday that the claim, if upheld, could end up being costly for both governments.

"This is an ambitious claim in the sense that they are seeking an important territory that encompasses strategic locations," said Benoit Pelletier.

Pelletier said the federal government will review the claim when it is officially filed and said the province will get involved in negotiations with Ottawa if there are any. "But this is the kind of process that will take years," he added.

Max Gros-Louis, chief of the Huron-Wendat nation, said a comprehensive land claim will be filed in the spring over the traditional territory occupied by the Huron-Wendat over the past 300 years.

"It's a historic day," Gros-Louis said.

The Huron-Wendat - who originate from the Georgian Bay-area in Ontario - migrated to the Quebec City-area in the mid-1600s. They occupied six different sites before settling in 1697 in Wendake, a village located some 15 kilometres north of Quebec City.

The band council has made several specific claims over the years for territory surrounding Quebec City. This is the first time they unveiled the extent of their land claims in the province.

Gros-Louis said he is not looking to wage war on the governments and the cities affected by the claim, but wants the nation's rights to be recognized on this territory.

"We want to be able to use our territory and be part of its development," Gros-Louis said, noting his people also want to have fishing and hunting rights.

Since 1998, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada has run a program to deal with comprehensive claims for land that is known to have traditionally belonged to the First Nations.

A spokeswoman for the department said Thursday the government couldn't comment on the Huron-Wendat claim since it hasn't been officially filed.

The territory under claim stretches from the St. Maurice River, in the Mauricie region, to the Saguenay River, near Tadoussac. From south to north, the land stretches from the St. Lawrence River to the north of the Laurentides Wildlife Reserve.

© Canwest News Service 2008

TRUE: What about Eagle Place?

Chiefs did not surrender land in disputed 1844 document Posted 6 hours ago http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1228669

This is in response to Garry Horsnell who asked about Six Nations' vantage point on the 1844 so-called surrender of the Eagle's Nest Tract and other lands in and around Brantford, "Six Nations chiefs surrendered land in 1844 document," Sept. 26.

There is a short and a long answer to this valid and pivotal question. The short answer I will give here. The long answer will be covered at the Oct. 29 meeting of TRUE (Two Row Understanding through Education) with Six Nations researchers and archivists Phil Monture and others.

The 1844 document cannot stand in isolation from other contemporary and relevant documents dating immediately before and after it, which helps to put into context the understanding of the day, not necessarily today's interpretation of it.

This 1844 document was not a legitimate surrender, as it has been referred to. It is the minutes of a meeting in which it was agreed by the chiefs who signed it, (actually put X's to) that further discussion on the matter should take place. As was the proper rule of law regarding land surrender as set out by the Crown at the time and even today, for a legitimate surrender of land to be deemed as legal, there would have to be a surveyor's map of the area described in the document, which there wasn't; there should also have been an official Order in Council, which there wasn't. Other contemporary documents on either side of the date of the 1844 document show that Six Nations' understanding of it was much different from what has been assumed by the Crown, then and now.

Besides that, Samuel Jarvis, the architect of this so-called surrender, was removed from his office as Superintendent of Indian Affairs less than a year later for fraud and misrepresentation, among other serious charges of character. This came after the third internal government inquiry into Jarvis' dealings with the natives.

There are many other reasons why this 1844 document has never been accepted as legitimate by the people of Six Nations who have challenged its validity since shortly after it was signed. Because of its importance as a precedent and its complexity, this is an issue that must be dealt with through litigation, in my humble opinion. Right now, the federal government is using these minutes of a meeting as a legal and binding surrender, when it clearly is not according to British Common Law of 1844 or Canadian law of today.

This and other very important issues will be talked about on Oct. 29, at 7 p. m,. at the Wilfrid Laurier University Lecture Theatre at the old Odeon theatre on Market Street. Come and bring your questions.

Jim Windle

Brantford

One further note ... It matters not so much what documents the government has or can produce. What matters is what the government did with the money. If Six Nations did not receive funds from sales/leases of their land as per whatever agreements, then all transactions are null and void. Thus, the financial accounting that Six Nations has been demanding for many decades would tell the tale of what transactions were valid. Could that be why the government refuses to produce an accounting of Six Nations funds? Another note ... For casual observers who are still victim of the government's propaganda ... The starting point of Six Nations land 'claims' does not rely on just the Haldimand Proclamation of 1784, but on their historical occupancy of Southern Ontario: Local: Hamilton History - Native Indians & Early Explorers The first humans, the Clovis people, arrived in Niagara Region almost 12,000 years ago, around the time of the birth of the Falls, when the land was tundra with spruce forests. These nomadic hunters camped along the old Lake Erie shoreline, in small dwellings, and left little behind except chipped stones, likely used to hunt caribou, mastodons, moose and elk. By 9,500 years ago deciduous forest covered southernmost Ontario, supporting wildlife like deer, moose, fish and plants, enabling small groups to hunt in the winter, coming together into larger groups during the summer, to fish at shorelines and at the mouths of rivers. About 2,000 years ago, the Woodland Period brought Iroquois culture in southern Ontario. These peoples began agriculture based on crops of corn, bean and squash, which supported a boom in population and a rich culture with small palisaded villages in which extended families occupied individual longhouses. They developed ceramics technology and forged strong inter-village alliances. By the time the European explorers and missionaries arrived in the early 1600s, the Iroquoian villages had elected chiefs and were allied within powerful tribal confederacies. The Neutral Indians were the leaders of a group of ten tribes of the Iroquois Nation. Other tribes included the Seneca, Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Huron, Petun, Erie and the Susquehannock. The French explorers , gave this Indian tribe the name "Neutrals", because of their position and status as peace keepers between the warring Hurons and Iroquois. (Five Nations)

http://www.foundlocally.com/Hamilton/local/Info-CityHistoryIndians.htm

And I would note also that the 'Clovis people' in the area did not disappear but evolved as we all did, and are the ancestors of the Six Nations of today. The 'claim' of Six Nations to territory in Southern Ontario is ancestral. http://grannyrantson.blogspot.com/2008/09/media-release-six-nations-rotianehson.html

CROWN BUYS FANTINO'S SILENCE WITH BRANT'S FREEDOM: TMT Support _________

MSM reports ...

No more jail time for Shawn Brant

Aboriginal activist found guilty

By THE CANADIAN PRESS

Last Updated: 29th September 2008, 3:10pm

BELLEVILLE, Ont. — Aboriginal activist Shawn Brant will not spend any more time in jail for his actions in two blockades last year near Deseronto, Ont.

In an unexpected move, what was to be the start of three weeks of pretrial motions in the case turned into a 30-minute trial Monday morning in Belleville.

Judge Stephen Hunter found Brant guilty of three counts of mischief exceeding $5,000.

Brant was charged for an April 2007 protest that halted rail traffic on CN Rail’s main line, and for leading a blockade during last year’s aboriginal day of action in June that shut down Hwy. 401.

Brant was sentenced to 57 days of pretrial custody, a 90-day conditional sentence and one year of probation.

During his probation, he is banned from participating in or organizing any unlawful protests and owning weapons — with the exception of those used for aboriginal hunting and fishing.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2008/09/29/6922006.html

Mohawk protester Brant gets light penalty for blockades Last Updated: Monday, September 29, 2008 | 1:54 PM ET

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/09/29/brant-charges.html?ref=rss Facing numerous defence motions that would have laid bare police actions, the Crown dropped most charges Monday against an aboriginal protester who helped organize a blockade last summer of an Ontario highway and rail line, and agreed to a slap-on-the-wrist-penalty for the remaining ones. Shawn Brant, a Mohawk from the Tyendinaga Territory near Desoronto, Ont., was facing nine counts of mischief and breach of bail conditions for his role in two demonstrations: the June 29, 2007, national day of action for aboriginal peoples and an earlier event in April 2007. Both protests saw the temporary closing of the CN Rail line that carries Via Rail trains from Toronto to Ottawa and Montreal. The day of action also resulted in the shutdown, for several hours, of Highway 401 and Highway 2. On Monday, as part of a deal with the defence, the Crown dropped all but three of the mischief charges, on which Brant was found guilty. Even though the Crown had previously announced it would seek a jail sentence of 12 years, it agreed to have Brant receive a sentence of time already served in pretrial detention, plus a 90-day conditional sentence to be spent on his reserve. Brant said outside court he accepted the deal for the sake of his family. It means the Ontario Provincial Police's "illegal actions" in handling the protests will remain secret, he said, though it will mean OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino will have to face questions about his conduct. "Commissioner Fantino has always said he couldn't comment because it's before the courts. Well, now it's settled, and it's time the public hears from Mr. Fantino," Brant said. OPP's 'broken promises' Brant's lawyer Peter Rosenthal was preparing to argue in court in Napanee, Ont., on Monday that, in the case of the April 2007 demonstration, the OPP had agreed not to charge Brant if the blockade was lifted peacefully and promptly — which he says it was. But police broke their promise, Rosenthal's defence motion said, at Fantino's insistence because of his "personal and political attitude towards Brant." (In a wiretapped phone conversation, Fantino would later threaten Brant that "your whole world's going to come crashing down" because the OPP chief would "do everything I can within your community and everywhere to destroy your reputation.") The motion to have the resulting charges dismissed argued that "the breaking of the OPP promise of immunity must be considered in the context of the long history of broken promises made by Canadian governments to First Nations peoples in Canada." The defence also would have challenged the constitutionality of the Criminal Code's emergency wiretap provisions, which the OPP used during the national day of action for aboriginal peoples to bug the phones of Brant and his fellow organizers. Section 184.4 of the Criminal Code authorizes wiretaps without a judicial warrant in "exceptional circumstances" – namely when the situation is too urgent to get a judge's permission and there is a threat of a crime causing serious harm to any person or to property. But the OPP knew days ahead of time about the planned day of action protests, meaning there was no reason not to get a judge's approval beforehand for the phone surveillance, another defence motion said. Land dispute Tyendinaga Mohawk leaders are in talks with a federally appointed land claims negotiator to try to resolve their dispute over more than 400 hectares of land on the Bay of Quinte in Ontario – about 25 kilometres east of Belleville – including the site of a quarry and other businesses. The Mohawk community has been negotiating with the federal government since 2003. Protesters are angry that gravel continues to be hauled off parts of the land while negotiations are ongoing. The protesters, who say talks are progressing too slowly, began an occupation of the quarry in March 2007. Before Monday, Brant had been free on $100,000 bail, amid tight conditions, since Aug. 31

More ...

It is the efforts to strengthen Mohawk Nations' economies and sovereignty that threaten the implementation of Canada's colonial agenda. The policing agendas of the Canadian government aim to crack down on this assertion of self-sufficiency and strength, not, as they claim, "organized crime".

CROWN BUYS FANTINO'S SILENCE WITH BRANT'S FREEDOM - Statement from the Tyendinaga Support Committee (Monday, September 29th, 2008) Today, in a Belleville court, a conviction for three counts of mischief was entered against Mohawk spokesperson Shawn Brant for his role in the CN rail line and Highway 401 blockades which took place in April and June, 2007. Brant has been ordered to stay on the Tyendinaga reserve for three months and to be on probation for one year. Originally, the Crown had been asking for 12 years in jail for Brant. While Shawn Brant will face no more jail time for the blockades and will not go to trial, there are still 16 people from the Tyendinaga facing criminal charges for defending their community. The critical issues which prompted the Mohawks to take action have yet to be addressed. Most of the community does not have drinkable water. Most households have been unable to drink the water from their own taps for at least the last decade. The reserve school, with 300+ students, ranging in age from 2 to 13, who attend daily, has had its water deemed unfit for human consumption for the past eighteen months. In addition, the lands which comprise the Culbertson Tract and Simcoe Deed have yet to be returned. This despite all levels of governments' admission that the lands do legitimately belong to the Mohawks of Tyendinaga. In Shawn Brant's case, the dramatic turn-around by government lawyers came after disturbing details of OPP impropriety, abuse of practice and the flaunting of policing guidelines created after the Ipperwash Inquiry were made public in July of this year, following the lifting of a publication ban on Brant's preliminary hearing. Abuses revealed included OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino's threats to Shawn Brant that "your whole world's going to come crashing down", the orders to have snipers and armored personnel carriers on standby, and the presence of an undercover police officer posing as a media cameraman. The preliminary hearing also revealed that the OPP used an obscure section of the Criminal Code to implement an emergency wiretap of Brant and other Mohawks' telephone conversations, on June 28th, 2007, even though the National Day of Action had been publicly planned for months. The Crown went to great lengths to try to keep this critical information from becoming known and was successful in keeping the material under a publication ban for about a year. The release of these damning details prompted calls for the firing of OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino. Pretrial motions, originally set to begin today, would have seen Commissioner Fantino subpoenaed to answer for his conduct leading up to and during the 2007 Aboriginal Day of Action. Since the blockades of 2007, CUPE Ontario has passed a resolution in support of the Mohawks of Tyendinaga, NDP MPP Peter Kormos has called for the firing of OPP Chief Fantino and thousands of people have attended events, made donations and signed petitions in support of the Mohawks and their demands. Shawn Brant's arrest and the excessive prison sentence that the crown sought against him were part of an attempt to destabilize the community of Tyendinaga. However, the Mohawks of Tyendinaga remain united and continue to fight for what should already be theirs: land and clean water. The Tyendinaga Support Committee is a Toronto-based organization working to support the Mohawks of Tyendinaga. For more information, visit: www.ocap.ca/supporttmt or email us at support.tmt@gmail.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fantino hasn't been fired yet, but they went to great lengths to keep his mouth shut. He already almost blew two difficult situations sky high, with his mouth. Pointing guns at men women youth and elders didn't help either. This isn't over yet. Fantino must go. He's a friggen disaster looking for a place to happen! granny ------------------------- More BACKGROUND from TMT Support ... For more information, please read the following article:

IPPERWASH INQUIRY: LESSONS UNLEARNED:

THE OPP AND TYENDINAGA MOHAWK TERRITORY

- Tyendinaga Support Committee

In April 2008, the Mohawk community of Tyendinaga was subjected to an unacceptable escalation of police tactics, including the drawing of guns by OPP officers on unarmed Mohawks. At the time, the OPP laid unfounded, fear-mongering claims, saying they saw 'one long gun' at the quarry reclamation site, a land reclamation that the Mohawks have been holding for more than a year, as part of their struggle for the return of the Culbertson Tract. The language of the alleged threat is not unfamiliar to Native people in Ontario. In 1995 Stoney Point protester Dudley Charge was shot and killed by the OPP during a land reclamation at Ipperwash provincial park after an officer thought he saw him holding a "long gun," though the protesters were in fact unarmed.

In 2006, the Ipperwash Inquiry found that the 1995 murder of Dudley George was contributed to by centuries of discrimination and dispossession rooted in racism. Justice Sidney Linden concluded that Ipperwash revealed a deep schism in Canada's relationship with First Nations peoples and was symbolic of a grievous history of destructive government policies. The Inquiry made constructive findings and recommendations regarding policing, appalling decision-making, the wrongful use of force against indigenous people, and the racist demeanor of Ontario's then-Premier Mike Harris and the police.

Despite these findings, it appears that Ontario has opted for the criminalization of First Nations people over the resolution of outstanding land issues. Justice Linden's Ipperwash Inquiry policing recommendations are being flaunted by the OPP, and in particular, by Chief Julian Fantino.

What lessons have really been learned in the 13 years since Dudley George was killed? To what lengths are the authorities prepared to go in order to quash indigenous resistance and sovereignty?

Publication Ban lifted on the Preliminary Inquiry:

On Juy 18^th, 2008, the publication ban on Shawn Brant's preliminary hearing, which took place in August 2007, was lifted in a Napanee Court, making crucial evidence available to public scrutiny for the first time. That afternoon, Crown prosecutors appeared before a judge of the Court of Appeal in Toronto. No defence lawyers were present, as they had received only 6 minutes notice of this second, frantic court appearance. The Crown successfully convinced the judge to issue a stay, on the grounds that the ban was in the accused, Shawn Brant's, best interests. The media was ordered to "immediately cease reporting on evidence heard at the preliminary inquiry and remove all related reports from websites".

Then, at shortly after 5pm the same day, lawyers for the CBC and Mr. Brant appeared before the same Appeals judge, along with Crown counsel. After substantial submissions, the judge lifted her earlier stay and dismissed the stay application altogether, ordering the publication ban lifted once more.

It is fairly rare for the prosecution to fight for a publication ban on court proceedingswhen the defence is opposed to it. In Shawn's case, the media coverage of the 2007 blockades and Shawn's role as spokesperson is vast. The public record of Shawn's very public actions stands, and the defence has no interest in suppressing evidence relating to the case. This begs the question: why has the Crown been so persistent in fighting to keep the preliminary hearing quiet? The evidence released after the publication ban was lifted gives some insight into possible answers.

Julian Fantino's Testimony:

With the publication ban lifted, disturbing information emerged. The evidence released included the testimony of Chief Fantino at Mr. Brant's preliminary hearing. The public learned about the conduct of Commissioner Fantino in relation to members of the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory, including his knowledge of wiretaps placed without the approval or oversight of a judge, his apparent dismissal of the authority and importance of Aboriginal OPP officers, the direct threats made to Mohawk spokesperson Shawn Brant, and Mr. Fantino's utter disregard of the recommendations of Justice Linden's Ipperwash Report.

Highlights of the evidence released include the following:

• In June 2007, the OPP imposed wiretaps on members of the Tyendinaga Mohawk community without judicial authorization, using an emergency section of the Criminal Code. The lead investigator in Mr. Brant's case has acknowledged that the OPP was not necessarily going to disclose that these taps had occurred. Mr. Brant's lawyers were informed of the existence of the wiretap on his phone only on the Friday afternoon before his preliminary hearing was to begin on the following Monday.

• Besides tapping the cell and home phone lines of Shawn Brant, the OPP also tapped three other phones: two of Shawn's friends, Mario Baptiste Sr. and Mario Baptiste Jr., and Shawn's brother, Gregory Brant, a prominent local lawyer. The latter is particularly shocking, given Gregory Brant has opposing political views from those of his brother and had no association to or involvement in the blockades of June 29^th, 2007. It is not known whether the tap on his phone includes privileged solicitor-client conversations, which cannot be listened to by other parties.

• At Mr. Brant's preliminary hearing, Fantino said he'd never heard of such a tap being used by the OPP and denied any knowledge of who had decided to implement the tap. Furthermore, Fantino refused to look into this question or provide defence counsel with further information about the wire tap or policy related to its use.

• Fantino's wiretapped conversations with Shawn Brant on June 29, 2007 reveal him making numerous threats against Mr. Brant. Fantino said to Mr. Brant, "your whole world's going to come crashing down" and threatened to "do everything I can within your community and everywhere to destroy your reputation". Police Chief Fantino is also quoted as saying, " I'm now telling you pull the plug or you will suffer grave consequences."

• During his testimony at the preliminary inquiry, Fantino appears to have perjured himself by admitting he knew of the existence of the wiretap on Mr. Brant's phone, on or before June 29^th, and then contradicted himself, claiming he had no such knowledge until some time after June 29^th.

• Fantino laid the groundwork to come down on the National Day of Action blockade in Tyendinaga on June 29th with full force - a message sent to the Mohawks through intermediaries indicated that tanks, the military, snipers and SWAT teams were on standby to open Highway 401, despite knowledge that the blockade was already scheduled to be taken down at the end of June 29th. "There were in fact plans underway at that time for a forced removal of the blockade, weren't there?" Rosenthal asked him during his testimony. "Yes, there was," Fantino replied.

• In his exchange with Mr. Brant, Fantino contradicted the OPP's guidelines for dealing with aboriginal groups, which were developed in the wake of the police killing of Dudley George. Disrespecting First Nations OPP officers and disrespecting their role as negotiators, Fantino refers to them at one point as "your (ie Shawn's) officers".

• Contrary to the recommendations of the Ipperwash report, and OPP guidelines on policing aboriginal blockades, Fantino repeatedly showed no cultural respect for Mohawk processes of decision-making, asserting that Mr. Brant is "the man in charge" and can "pull the plug any time he wants to". Fantino refused to acknowledge or respect any process for reaching consensus within the community, despite repeated attempts by Shawn to make this clear during the taped conversations. In his testimony at the preliminary inquiry, Fantino dismissed this process as a "stalling tactic".

• Evidence also included that of an undercover officer who stated that he posed as a media cameraman when he investigated the blockades of June 29, 2007, held as part of the First Nations National Day of Action. In its application to lift the ban, counsel for the CBC asserted that he had grave concerns about such activity by police officers.

Ipperwash Recommendations Ignored:

According to an OPP document drafted in the wake of the Ipperwash Inquiry entitled A Framework for Police Preparedness for Aboriginal Critical Incidents, local First Nations police must play a lead role in any police response to First Nations protest. The document calls for building a "trusting relationship" with "mutual respect" between the culture of First Nations people and police, as well as a need for "special concerns" with respect to aboriginal protests and blockades, given their historical rights.

It also calls for "fostering trusting relationships between the OPP and aboriginal communities" and for a "critical incident mediator" who, during an incident, meets with aboriginal leaders to identify key issues and interests and communicates those to the police commander at the incident. It is also the mediator's responsibility to "develop in concert with the incident commander, a mutually acceptable and lasting resolution strategy."

The evidence at the preliminary inquiry shows that this was indeed taking place on June 29, in Tyendinaga. The Mohawks were communicating and negotiating with members of the Aboriginal Liason Team.

However, the evidence also shows that Fantino repeatedly undercut such involvement by interrupting negotiations between the people blockading the 401 and First Nations constables with threatening calls to Brant's cellphone.

According to Shawn's lawyer, Peter Rosenthal, "The point is not simply that a commissioner of the OPP should speak more appropriately. The concern is that an OPP officer speaking like that in such a context could have derailed negotiations entirely, leading to a horrible outcome. Luckily, Brant and his colleagues continued negotiations with the First Nations officers to a successful conclusion, in spite of Fantino's provocations."

At the preliminary inquiry, Fantino was confronted with several points from the Framework. He was then asked by defence counsel: "I put it to you that the document that we looked at and the concerns of the Ipperwash inquiry, and many other concerns that you're aware of, have indicated that, in situations like this, for the public good as well as for the respect of the protestors involved, it's important to understand where they're coming from and deal with their cultural values and so on."

Fantino responded: "There's nothing in the spirit, the intent, or the written word in this document that justifies criminal conduct, or that exonerates people from accountability from criminal conduct, or that it [sic] absents me as a law enforcement officer from exercising discretion, or using the authority bestowed upon me to effect a lawful purpose."

Fantino was then asked: "And doesn't, though, that document and many other documents speak to the way you should do that in situations involving aboriginal protestors?"

He replied: "These are guidelines and they're principles; they're not a firm and fixed mandated way of doing business."

The Ipperwash recommendations were designed to avoid violence, regardless of whether criminal charges will subsequently be laid. For Fantino to dismiss the recommendations as mere "guidelines," given the grave consequences of racist policing which prompted them in the first place, should be cause for great alarm.

Fantino and McGuinty Respond:

A media storm followed the lifting of the publication ban. After allegations that Fantino had violated the Ipperwash recommendations were printed and broadcast in national newspapers and on national television and radio, Fantino issued two statements In one, he stated, regarding lesson he had learned from the controversy surrounding the OPP's handling of the National Day of Action at Tyendinaga, that "as a law enforcement officer, I happen to have all the right enemies". In another statement, Fantino said, in part, "Consistent with the recommendations from the Ipperwash inquiry, the OPP continues to work collectively with legitimate First Nations leadership and communities to ensure that both the interests of participants during lawful protests and public safety can be served in the best way possible."

The Ipperwash recommendations were not about what the police would consider to be "lawful protests," nor about working with what the police would consider to be "legitimate First Nations leadership." The entire Ipperwash report was designed to apply to incidents such as the reclamation of Ipperwash Park and the blockades of June 29, 2007. It was designed to avoid violence and the death of Native people standing up for their land. If Fantino remains Chief of the OPP, how can we be certain that future bloodshed will be avoided?

Fantino's conduct during these blockades was in contravention of both OPP guidelines and the recommendations of the Ipperwash report. Above and beyond this, his actions were threatening, unprofessional and discriminatory.

Following the public furor, which included NDP Justice Critic Peter Kormos' call for Fantino to resign or be fired, Premier McGunity was quoted as stating that Commissioner Fantino had "demonstrated tremendous discipline", and that his position is "a tough job when people get really hot".

An OPP Commissioner must have the ability to conduct himself appropriately in complex situations, an essential skill Fantino clearly lacked on June 29^th, 2007. But even two months later at Shawn Brant's preliminary inquiry—not in a 'heated' situation—Fantino continued to demonstrate his lack of commitment to implementing recommendations of the Ipperwash inquiry. Fantino's public statements with respect to his conduct are an attempt to obfuscate and distract from the issues at hand – namely, how First Nations people are policed in this province.

It is important to note that in Justice Linden's 1,433-page report, the OPP received the bulk of the criticism for actions leading up to the shooting, including "the use of excessive force" and being "culturally insensitive''. Fantino's conduct on June 29^th, 2007 directly contravenes the recommendations of Justice Linden, and sets an unacceptably dangerous and disrespectful precedent for government and police response to First Nations grievances.

The Premier's job should instead be to ensure that the Commissioner, a political appointee whom the Liberal government quietly handed an extension of term in early 2008, is thoroughly investigated, with a view to resignation.

What's Next:

The current situation in Tyendinaga has begun to look like a sweeping crack-down on community members and the stifling of resistance to increased policing and further development of the Culbertson Tract. At the time of writing, 16 men and women from Tyendinaga are facing charges stemming from the OPP stand-off in April 2008, all saddled at minimum with conditions of 'no protests' and 'not to be present at the quarry site'.

At the same time, federal monies are being poured into the Territory for policing matters, and an RCMP report has been released, citing federal government intentions to dedicate police "to fighting contraband, which he [Stockwell Day] said is funding organized crime and possibly even terrorists" in three Mohawk communities, including Tyendinaga. It is important to remember that the feds' concern with Native-made smokes and sales go much deeper than their own pocket book. It is not simply the lost tax revenue that they suffer, but the fact that the lost dollars go to sustain Mohawk families and other services and allows for the Mohawk Nation to stand, as it always has, as a clear and organized force of resistance against the Canadian government's practices of assimilation and control of First Nations peoples.

It is the efforts to strengthen Mohawk Nations' economies and sovereignty that threatens the implementation of Canada's colonial agenda. The policing agendas of the Canadian government aim to crack down on this assertion of self-sufficiency and strength, not, as they claim, "organized crime".

In late July, Larry Hay, the former police chief of the Mohawk Tyendinaga First Nation made public his efforts to take the Ontario Provincial Police to court after being fired by OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino for speaking out against racism in policing. "They've learned nothing from Ipperwash," said Hay, who is seeking a judicial review hoping a court will reinstate him in the job. He is considering a wrongful dismissal suit if a judicial review fails.

The community of Tyendinaga has, through working to re-establish a longhouse, self-governance, and economic self-sufficiency, long been a thorn in the side of the Canadian state, and its project of oppression and genocide of First Nations peoples.

That the government lawyers looked to ask for twelve years prison time for Shawn Brant is not about the blockades of last summer. It is about sending a loud message to First Nations people who are not interested in submitting to the exploitation of their lands and resources, nor the continued denigration and suffering of their communities. This was a state response of fear and concern that First Nations resistance will continue, and will succeed in forcing the rest of this country's population to realize that long-standing crimes against the Mohawk community of Tyendinaga, and all other First Nations communities, must be righted.

support.tmt@gmail.com http://www.ocap.ca/supporttmt/index.html ______________________________

_________________ six_nations_info mailing list six_nations_info@masses.tao.ca https://masses.tao.ca/lists/listinfo/six_nations_info

R

"Under no law is theft legal" Janie Jamieson On August 21, 2007 a powerful message of truth was delivered to the Law Society of Upper Canada by Six Nations of the Grand River spokesperson Janie Jamieson. Historian Dr. Anthony Hall made a valid point when he said, "the route to wealth for newcomers (referring to early colonizers) is land sales and land development." They are offering us money that was made from the lands they stole from us. In all reality it’s like someone stealing a car, renting it out and then offering the true owner of the car the money they made by renting it. It’s like claiming the car is now the legal property of the thief. Is that a legal process? Is that justice for the vic tim of the theft? No, but when it comes to our stolen lands CANADA claims it is. We all know under no law is theft legal. More ... http://www.newtfn.com/thetruth.html

Six Nations, Brantford:

Work stopped on Eagle Place housing site 'We're here to make sure that no shovel is put into the ground'

Posted By VINCENT BALL AND MICHAEL-ALLAN MARION, EXPOSITOR STAFF

Updated 3 hours ago

A Six Nations group blocked an attempt to begin work Monday on the site of a new housing development at Erie Avenue and Birkett Lane.

Up to 30 members of the Haudenosaunee Men's Fire gathered at the site of a 99-home subdivision at about 6 a. m. and didn't leave until early afternoon.

Their efforts prevented city work crews from beginning work to provide servicing to the site, which is one of five designated no-go zones in bylaws passed by the city and an injunction obtained in Ontario Superior Court prohibiting activities that stop construction work.

"We're required to be here. It's our duty to be here, " said native spokesman Dahwehido:geh, also known as Phillip W. Skye.

"This land is part of the Eagle's Nest Tract. It has never been surrendered, ceded or given up and it's our duty to protect it.

"We're here to make sure that no shovel is put into the ground."

As he spoke, Skye had a replica of the Two Row Wampum draped over his arm.

He said development of the site would damage the area's eco-system and he encouraged city officials to move away from developing vacant land.

Skye said Men's Fire members were at the site as ambassadors to peacefully and respectfully present their view.

They met with police to discuss safety during the blockade, Skye said.

The Men's Fire received a boost from a visit by Six Nations Chief Coun. Bill Montour.

"It looks like it's on a flood plain," Montour said of the housing development. "What are they trying to do here, build another New Orleans?" The proposed development is another example of how good farmland is being ruined and replaced by concrete, he said.

Six Nations people have an obligation to protect the land and the environment.

"Concrete doesn't allow you to grow good crops and, on behalf of most of us on the elected council, we're behind you on this one," Montour said.

City Mayor Mike Hancock declined to comment, citing the fact the bylaws and the injunction.

"It's a matter for the police," he said. Coun. John Bradford, who represents the area of contention, said he talked with various residents.

He said some in the area are supporting the activists, mainly because they either oppose the development or are in sympathy with them.

"These people perhaps naively don't understand that they are hurting the economic development of Brantford," he said.

"Even though they think they're doing a good service in their backyard, they're not. One group of neighbours is working against another group."

Article ID# 1200914 ....................................................

NOTE TO BLOG READERS: Eagle's Nest the site of this protest, is not part of a land claim because IT IS ALREADY PART OF SIX NATIONS RESERVE #40 !!! With this development, Brantford is encroaching on reserve land, previously on short term leases (in default), but clearly not 'belonging' to Brantford. However, it appears that the province has issued deeds and approvals and so has the Brantford City Council. This is the game our politicians play ... one level pretends it doesn't know what the other is doing, and they all develop (occupy) land and extract resources madly, evading the law. Our governments and politicians, all of them of all stripes, since Confederation and now, have openly defiled the rights of the Indigenous Peoples of Canada. We are still accountable for the Treaties the Crown made with sovereign Indigenous Peoples, the allies of the Crown in the founding of Canada. Canada legislates the 'existence' (status) of Canada's Aboriginal people, in the protection of the Crown, thus controlling all of their assets including the land and its resources. We call it Canada, and our economy relies entirely on the resources from Indigenous land - Kanata. The governments just stall. "Aboriginal and Treaty Rights" were "recognized and affirmed" 26 years ago in CANADIAN LAW ... the Canadian Constitution (1867, 1982). However, now there is such brazen and devastating encroachment on their land at such speed, that they are forced to respond. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Early report ... CKRZ NEWS 15 SEPT 08 Tekawennake News has reported that about 30 Six Nations residents were on hand to again defend their land on Erie Avenue & Birkett Lane in the Bell City. Morley Construction officials, who are to install new water mains for a proposed housing development at that location, were said to have met with Brantford, Ontario Police to determine a course of action. An officer was on the scene to serve a copy of a controversial injunction that was granted to the city to thwart demonstrations at other construction sites in Brantford and they were promptly removed after they were posted. Residents arrived at the site at six this morning. (Tekawennake News) (CKRZ)